Cross v. McMaken
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to St. Joseph Circuit. McMaken, plaintiff below, sued out a writ of attachment against Cross and McDowell. The affidavit upon which the writ was issued, is in the words following: “STATE OF MICHIGAN ss St. Joseph County.
Read the full summary
Error to St. Joseph Circuit. McMaken, plaintiff below, sued out a writ of attachment against Cross and McDowell. The affidavit upon which the writ was issued, is in the words following: “STATE OF MICHIGAN ss St. Joseph County. R. W. Melendy being duly sworn, says that lie makes this affidavit for and in behalf of E. Y. McMaken, of the city of Toledo, State of Ohio, and that Samuel Cross and William McDowell, co-partners, doing business under the firm name and style of Cross and McDowell at Leonidas, in said County of St. Joseph, who are the defendants named in the annexed writ of attachment,…
1Opinion of the Court
Ohristiancy J.
The. only question in this case is that of the sufficiency of the affidavit upon which the writ of attachment issued.
The statute — Comp. A. Oh. Ufi, § P — requires the affidavit to state, among other things, “that the defendant is indebted to the plaintiff, and specifying the amount of such indebtedness, as near as may be, over and above all legal offsets, and that the same is dtoe upon contract, express or implied, or upon judgment.”
The affidavit in this case, is that the defendants “are justly indebted to the said E. Y. McMaken, plaintiff in this *515writ, upon express contract,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Wilson v. ArnoldMichigan Supreme Court · 1858
- Buckley v. LowryMichigan Supreme Court · 1852
3Cited by4 opinions
- Mathews v. DensmoreMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Dickinson v. First National BankNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1933
- Tanner & Delaney Engine Co. v. Hall & MobleySupreme Court of Florida · 1886
- Linn v. SmithU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan · 1870